The Employment Tribunal on Video/Lync/Skype

The long awaited (at least by me)   hearing of the preliminary point in my Employment  Tribunal actions against the Jesuit trustees of Donhead School and Paul Chitnis who manages Jesuit Missions as well as being Chair of the School's governors, was heard yesterday. 

The case was long and interesting lasting from approximately 10 am to shortly before 6pm when the decisions was given on the point of whether or not I was an employed school clerk who benefitted from most employment laws, or a self employed for whom most of the rules do not apply.

The Respondent Jesuits and Paul, had learned counsel arguing for them whereas I relied on yours truly. Presumably the respondents had deep pockets to be able to fund their case. They may of course have had  insurance though usually that becomes clear at an earlier stage, for example by the insurers becoming  involved with discussions through ACAS. There were discussions through ACAS and Father Adrian Porter SJ was I recollect involved at  that juncture. The case of course  cost yours truly, nothing.

There was some amusement when I described the respondents as "Jesuitical" giving the dictionary definition of: 

dissembling or equivocating in the manner once associated with Jesuits

The Employment Judge was excellent. She managed the long hearing with skill and patience, adding that time was less limited than would be the case in  pre-Covid-19 days as she and I were working from home where hours were up to us rather than geared to the ET building's opening hours. 

I too found the hearing arrangements far better than in pre Covid-19 days when attending at a building would have been involved. Now  there is no travelling no need to wear a suit and of course tea and sandwiches at home rather than in say a dingy West Croydon cafe. I would expect such changes to be adopted by employment tribunals after the Covid-19 pandemic has passed.

Ultimately the decision was that I was self employed rather than employed so could not benefit from the relevant employment legislation. She indicated that if I had been regarded as employed she would have allowed the full hearing to proceed subject to my paying in effect a refundable deposit of up to £1,000. 

Similar decisions have been successfully appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal, which has criticised Employment judges for being too restrictive  where both  discrimination and unfair dismissal are alleged.

I could therefore appeal to the EAT but have at present decided not to trouble as I was able to question the prime mover in the Respondents' defence, Paul Chitnis, who sadly manages Jesuit Missions as well as chairs Donhead Governors.

No one from the Jesuits themselves troubled to turn up. The Jesuits left attendance to their counsel and the second respondent Paul, which surprised me not at all given the documents produced (slowly) showing that Father Adrian Porter had been involved behind my back with Paul Chitnis and coming to a conclusion which Paul had sought. The Donhead head, Paul and Father Adrian Porter all know each other away from the School. Father Porter lives at St John's Beaumont; the Donhead headhad been deputy there and Pauls son went  to school there. The behind my back discussions between Father Adrian Porter and Paul Chitnis could not not have taken place fairly and Father Porter neither  took the trouble to speak with me first nor informed me of that having occurred, when I appealed Paul's decision to him.

Needless to add, the payments the respondents said in their defence signed by counsel and solicitors, had been paid to me, were never paid.